Both Foma and Ilford have made colour materials in the past. Foma's were probably based on the old Per-war Agfa formulas. They can't dust off those old formulas as they are not for the current popular process of E-6 and or C-41 (or ECN2 and ECP2).
There have been rumours out of China on APUG that someone by the name of SUNNY has set up to produce a colour product based on the old Ferania/Dynacolor/3M/Imation/Ferania products. This rumour is vague enough that it might (or might not) include actual machinery and technology.
Foma has been using Film Cassettes that are identical to what ferania was using at the close, so it is likely that they have bought at least Some items from the ferania Close out sale.
Anyone who used Ferania Film will of course remember that while it was "Good" it was not "Great". Anyone who is still using film is probably looking for GREAT.
Another shade on this topic is that the Kodak film Marketing business is now owned by the Kodak Limited pension Plan. I would be surprised if someone has not been working on a spreadsheet on the economics of buying or leasing Harrow to make smaller batches of Film than is economical at Building 38. That sort of plan may have one of the remaining makers contracting to do the conversion and packaging of the coated film. If the files were not already thrown away, it should only take a few months work to get at least Kodacolour back in production there.
The take away is that it probably is not worth speculating at this point. let sjust enjoy what we have.
I still live just beyond the fringe in Stittsville
Old saying (I don't know the source):
Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick
"Those who say something cannot be done should not interrupt those actually doing it".
"People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.
The Harrow plant is now owned by KPP, not just a film marketing department.
"When making a portrait, my approach is quite the same as when I am portraying a rock. I do not wish to impose my personality upon the sitter, but, keeping myself open to receive reactions from his own special ego, record this with nothing added: except of course when I am working professionally, when money enters in,—then for a price, I become a liar..."
— Edward Weston, Daybooks, Vol. II, February 2, 1932
Well many tiny (by Kodak or Fujifilm standards) producers were making pretty good color photo films even in the 1960s and certainly in the 1970s.
Not everyone needs a Kodak scale production model to make a happy profit.
AGFA is still making some color film. It can be developed as a negative or reversal. Ferrania certainly has the knowledge and can ramp up. Sunny or Lucky in China and maybe even ORWO or Svema could do it.
For all the stuck people that are concerned that the lower tier producers may not make color film as good as Kodak or Fuji, I say I would rather have a nice supply of Good color film than NO supply of Great color film.
But then I am exstaticaly happy with Kodak Gold and Fujicolor consumer films which I think are amazingly great films for $2 a roll.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I understand, but your comment was meant to judge a situation and the reaction of a variety of people to that situation. That was the point of my comment. It was not intended to offend BTW. Nor is this reply.
Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick
I am actually doing it in workshops and my book in the sense that I am trying to help lay the groundwork for a future generation of photo engineers, albeit on a smaller scale. I have also made some color single layer coatings. So........
Originally Posted by Steve Smith
As to small manufacturers making color, Oriental comes to mind. Back in the 80s they came out with a color paper that was compatible with Ektaprint 3 chemistry. Actually, AFAIK, it was made by Mitsubishi which also made papers and films for other Japanese companies and was allied with Konishiroku.
An Agfa style film made today would have an ISO speed of between 10 and 25, and would be quite acceptable but not great in terms of what we think of today.
Being in Reading PA indicates to me that this buggy whip craftsman is on the edge or in Amish country, a natural marketplace for buggy whips!
TIP has been having it's issues, but they can produce a film product, because someone wanted to get it done.
Anyway, I was not necessarily suggesting starting from scratch or at least without capable people. Chemists and engineers, etc., can be hired as consultants or contracted when necessary. I know there aren't that many of these people around experienced in emulsions but maybe you need one or two experts on your staff to direct the effort and just access to other people to do the detail work. Besides, given training and education, people can and do learn. Look at everything people on this forum learn all the time - and that's just internet reading. What if a well-educated and interested organic chemist had a dedicated, bona-fide former Kodak or Agfa expert to learn from (as in data-dump) for a month? What could they accomplish then? I do not mean to imply that starting color film production is easy - just that if someone really wants to do it, it can be done.
Formulas, patents and other technology can be bought or licensed. It's done all the time! Maybe we don't start with equivalents of Portra and Ektar but with 1980's technology. Products can and will be improved and given the option of Kodacolor II or no color film at all.... Again, if someone really wants to do it, a way will be found.
Surplus manufacturing space with all the conveniences can be found all over the place for a song. I can show you empty manufacturing facilities right now with rail, electric, water, gas and whatever else service you want right now that commercial real estate agents cannot move at any price. No, they aren't film factories today, but when did that stop a businessman on a mission?
How big of a facility is really necessary, anyway? ADOX doesn't have a huge factory and look at the rat-hole EFKE was in. If a new coating machine needs to be obtained, we don't really need a machine capable of 54 inch wide rolls that are 6000 feet long do we? Maybe 24 inches wide by 500 feet long would be the right size capacity for today's market with probably at least an order of magnitude difference in implementation costs. Or, what about facilities like Innoviscoat? Maybe we don't even need the coating machine, we buy time on an existing shared resource when it is needed.
Exactly! Many of Kodak's current or at least recent products were likely made at Harrow once. If they want to make them there again it will be done. It is an exercise of solving the technical problems and justifying the costs. (Recall, here, the old joke about the accountant interviewing for a job.)
I would be surprised if someone has not been working on a spreadsheet on the economics of buying or leasing Harrow to make smaller batches of Film than is economical at Building 38.
Sure there are always gotchas, but if someone has the will to do something, a way can be found to overcome the obstacles. After all, Columbus DID get to the new world and NASA DID get to the moon.
All this has happened before, and all this will happen again.
NASA didn't have to turn a profit getting to the moon.
Ah if only I had access to some lottery money, I'd have a setup running. Sure there might not be any profit for a while but to have a future for film I think it'd totally be worth it. After all Impossible did it with Polaroids.
Originally Posted by kb3lms